Non-neutrality+of+AD+tools

Academic developers are often positioned as intermediaries who wield value-neutral tools—language, models, and techniques—to foster change in university teachers. Brinko’s (1991) taxonomy exemplifies the tacit acceptance of this code while acknowledging power differentials, the influence of communities of practice, and the interplay of practical and technical human interests. Recognizing the non-neutrality of the academic developer’s tools, however, opens the way to constructive reflection, intentional practice, and ethical consulting choices.
 * Investigating the non-neutrality of academic development tools**

Keeping in mind this objective, that participants will be able to: 1. Unearth and analyze underlying disciplinary, cultural, and ethical assumptions that shape the work of the developer 2. Plan new and innovative solutions to problems stemming from their location in a consulting relationship, a field, and/or organization

June 18, 2010 Outline of Investigating the non-neutrality of academic development tools to be led by Gail Rathbun and Nancy Turner.

1. Overview of position of this segment of the symposium (coming down to earth to excavate/investigate) in order to focus on 1:1 consultancy relationship, explore layers of sometimes tacit aspects of our practice and the consequences of their non-neutrality. Gail – 5 minutes 2. Distribute handout summarizing the mental models of consulting relationships ((see previously posted content below). Participants read; poll taken of “Is your espoused model the same as the model you actually use? “; ask up to 4 participants to explain their responses to the poll. Gail 8 minutes 3. The instruments of academic development. We have selected a number of instruments from the US and the UK that may be used or drawn upon by academic developers in their consultancy work. Provide a very brief contextual bit for each instrument as they are handed out. - Nancy 3 minutes a.Royal Holloway Teaching Observation form b.Quality Matters Rubric Standards c.Small Group Instructional Diagnosis d.Cognitive Interaction Analysis System e.Teaching Assessment By Students (TABS) f.Checklist of teaching skills g. NSS 2010 - NSS Questions and Optional Items.pdf

4. Small group discussion/activity – Groups consider instruments in light of these questions: Are there implicit values/ideological stances embedded in these models and instruments? To what extent do the values of the individual using the models and instruments influence the way in which they are used? They then produce a grafitti "wall" on paper, suitable for future excavators to interpret, expressing their answers to these questions. Nancy and Gail 8 minutes 5. Conclusion: Gail and Nancy pulling out some key ideas that have been found as we circulate – 1 minute

Overview (previously posted) So far in this symposium we have been flying at 30,000 feet using a geopolitical metaphor to scrutinize the biases, assumptions, and goals of the field of academic development. Now I am going to land the plane so that we obtain a close-up view of what Brinko has called the “interactions of teaching improvement”, also known as instructional consulting. Again, the notion of neutrality, or rather, non-neutrality, provides a novel way approach socio-cultural analysis of the tools and rules that shape, and are shaped by the activity of instructional consulting. What does it mean to be neutral? Most commonly it means a nation or person that does not take sides in a dispute or a competition. It can mean that positives and negatives are in balance. Power may be present in abundance but is neutralized when it cannot be transmitted. Or a neutral may be a color without chroma. The definition of a tool as a mediating instrument or sign implies its neutrality because, after all, to be useful the tool must be wielded by a human in service of a practical, and decidely, non-neutral interest. We may use the same tool in many ways for many purposes, providing further support for the view of a tool as neutral. With tools we shape and interpret our environment. Here we assert, however, that the tools we use, in turn, define us, and reflect the values and norms of the culture in which we work. What would be an example of a non-neutral tool? Would this be? Picture of a set of left-handed silverware.



What are the tools of the academic developer and how are they non-neutral? A common tool is the model or depiction of the consulting relationship, a conceptual model, to use Norman’s typology of models. Models both describe the relationship and help us predict its outcomes. How does a consultant “use” a model as a tool? The consultant may use a conceptual model to explain his or her approach to a client or to anyone. The use of a conceptual model will in many ways determine the types of activities in which the client and consultant will engage, as well as suggest the types and design of any instruments that are used.

Models are non-neutral in that they can • Be incomplete, not exhaustive, so “following” this model produces inferior, negative results • Represent a particular world view, perspective, or discipline, leading to success, perhaps, but skewed • Represent an imbalance of control, power, and authority which the consultant must correct by fulfilling the moral obligations of disinterestedness, diligence, disclosure, and care (Moberg, et al 1996?) A model of consulting may be perceived as non-neutral if • the model in use is prescribed by the external environment, not the participants, and the participants are in conflict with the prescription • the espoused model is not the model in use • The participants are operating under different models of interaction

What models of consulting do academic developers use or claim to use? Davies’categorization of instructional consulting relationships as product or process oriented has endured for more than three decades (Davies, 1975). In the product model of consulting, the client begins the relationship with an understanding of a problem or opportunity, and many times has already developed a solution. The consultant’s role is to assist the client in constructing a plan or materials; many times the consultant actually does the construction on behalf of the client, with input from the client at various stages. In the process model of consulting, the consultant helps the client engage in a problem solving process, from the identification of the problem, through the examination of alternative solutions, to problem resolution.

Within Davies’ overarching conceptualization of the consulting relationship, fall these more commonly used diadic expressions, each of which seems to point to an orientation toward process or product : o Counseled/counselor o Purchaser/seller o Patient/doctor o Subject/ Researcher o Non-expert/Expert o Information seeker/Information provider o Co-inquirer

Upon reflection, particularly in this era of client involvement in providing the services that professional practitioners are hired to perform, any of these diads could be categorized as product or process. The increased involvement of client, users, and customers, in processes that used to be the sole responsibility of professionals and experts is further evidence of the non-neutrality of models of relationships. Their participation represents a sharing of the moral obligations of the consultant mentioned above, obligations which address imbalance in the relationship.

Let’s take a few moments to consider the non-neutrality of the models of interaction presented here.

The counselor model emphasizes the consultant’s role as facilitator. In this instance, the client has authority, control, and the responsibility to engage honestly in the process. In this sense, the model accepts an unequal balance of power which is never equalized. The consultant focuses on asking the right questions; the client draws conclusions. The consultant presents options, and assists the client in examining the consequences, but the choice of action is left to the client. This model is espoused and used widely in the US. Clients, however, who are frequently operating within the Patient/Doctor model can find counselor-consultants frustrating. Thus, this model could be considered one of the least neutral of all the models mentioned here.

The Purchaser /Seller model of purchase attributed to Schein is clearly a product model. The instructional consultant has expertise that the consultee needs, usually for a specific purpose that the buyer has already determined. As in any “commercial” relationship, there is partisanship. Need, envy, or sometimes external coercion drives the mutually beneficial exchange of “goods.” This model implies that there is an economy in which the parties are participating. It acknowledges that a certain category of individuals lack something; balance is restored through purchase, reminiscent of Freire’s “alimentary” metaphor of education and teaching.

The Patient/Doctor model of prescription implies that the consultee is sick or “broken”. The consultant possesses diagnostic skill, a broad knowledge of remedies, and hopefully a good bedside manner. The model implies that good health (in this case good teaching) exhibits universally recognizable characteristics and is verifiable. I would suggest that this model is frequently the “model-in-use” but not the “espoused model.”

The consultant as researcher with the client and his or her students as subjects, is a model that expresses an inequality in the relationship but seeks to neutralize the imbalance by professing that neither party will have answers until evidence is collected and analyzed. The client becomes a kind of phenomenon interacting in an environment. Once study is completed, the consultant might adopt a counselor model of interaction, or could move to the Patient/Doctor model. Depending on the personal relationship and the research interests of th diad, the Co-inquiry model could then be adopted.